I'm an active pilot irl of a small beech musketeer.  The only jet experience I have is flying the Cirrus Vision Jet but that's very few.  So I like some things about the single GA props in MSFS and I don't like some things.  My biggest complaint is with the rudder.  I don't seem to have enough rudder authority to make proper crosswind landings.  And once I touch down in MSFS, there is a sudden force that pushes me one way or the other - and it's aggressive.  None of that is realistic so I become frustrated for that part of flying.  I really enjoyed how Realair mastered that part with their addons like the old Lancair Legacy or duke in older Sims.

I will say the Just Flight arrow seems a little better in this realm of flight so perhaps 3rd parties can adjust these things better than the default flight models.

I've flown DCS a bit but not nearly as much as XP11, P3D, or MSFS.  I also never flew a small GA in DCS so I've got no clue how they fly in that.

Another negative aspect of MSFS seems to be with constant speed props or turboprops.  With idle lower they dont appear to slow down like they would irl.  Maybe someone can correct me but with full prop prop and idle power, the big flat disc should become a drag component and help you slow down.  I think MSFS did improve this within SU4 or 5 though.

31 minutes ago, ryanbatcund said:

My biggest complaint is with the rudder.  I don't seem to have enough rudder authority to make proper crosswind landings.  And once I touch down in MSFS, there is a sudden force that pushes me one way or the other - and it's aggressive.  None of that is realistic so I become frustrated for that part of flying

This has been known and well-documented for over a year, and can happen in any aircraft in MSFS 2020, be it default, modded or 3rd party. Absolutely nothing has been done about it. Really hate to put it this way but sometimes it seems to me as if they copied the flight model of a cheap Mickey Mouse game and pasted it into MSFS 2020.

I think, with time, people will figure out how to get the best out of the flight model.  I feel that the possibilities are in place but the sim is so new that developers don't know how to take full advantage of it.

1 minute ago, EvidencePlz said:

This has been known and well-documented for over a year, and can happen in any aircraft in MSFS 2020, be it default, modded or 3rd party. Absolutely nothing has been done about it. Really hate to put it this way but sometimes it seems to me as if they copied the flight model of a cheap Mickey Mouse game and pasted it into MSFS 2020.

And I have the same impression when flying the sim that is supposed to be the cat's meow. I think the general model in MSFS is pretty good, just a couple of tweaks needed. The Cats meow sim ( shall rename nameless, ) has been tweaked for over 20 years and it still has issues. 

1 minute ago, Bobsk8 said:

And I have the same impression when flying the sim that is supposed to be the cat's meow. I think the general model in MSFS is pretty good, just a couple of tweaks needed. The Cats meow sim ( shall rename nameless, ) has been tweaked for over 20 years and it still has issues. 

Yes and no.  I think that we're stubborn simmers and are very resistant to change (especially as we get older!). MSFS planes "fly" differently than p3d.  I think xp11 and MSFS aircraft feel a lot closer to each other.  We're just starting off and I think in time the accuracy of flight models will come together.

39 minutes ago, ryanbatcund said:

My biggest complaint is with the rudder.  I don't seem to have enough rudder authority to make proper crosswind landings.  And once I touch down in MSFS, there is a sudden force that pushes me one way or the other - and it's aggressive. 

This is also true on takeoff. The amount of right rudder needed in the C172 is often exaggerated, but not as much in the C152, and I have considerable time in both. What’s really not realistic is the sudden need in some cases for left rudder on takeoff, which seems to be related to crosswinds that act in a non-realistic way on the aircraft while on the ground.

In the air, rudder inputs are more realistic to me, but it’s still a computer program, and I’m not sure even with the A2A planes that the modeling was perfect in FSX or P3D.

My expectations are just different for what the software does. I “fly” in the sim to review approaches and terrain near airports, and to ensure that when I do it in real life, I’ve “seen” it before. Or I “fly” to see areas of the world I probably won’t ever fly around IRL. For actual perfection of flight fidelity, I fly a real aircraft.

1 minute ago, neil0311 said:

For actual perfection of flight fidelity, I fly a real aircraft.

That's a good point hehe.  Id love to say that feeling of flight is most important in a sim.  But, for me at least, it's not. This is because there are so many different peripherals and so many settings which could affect how an identical sim reacts per each user.  For me feeling of flight is a close second to accurate avionics and in-sim weather.  The avioincs are finally coming together thanks to WorkingTitle.  The weather is okay but needs a lot of improvement to be accurate.  

Sometimes it's not possible to have a super accurate sim so yes, we take to the real skies.

 

6 minutes ago, ryanbatcund said:

That's a good point hehe.  Id love to say that feeling of flight is most important in a sim.  But, for me at least, it's not. This is because there are so many different peripherals and so many settings which could affect how an identical sim reacts per each user.  For me feeling of flight is a close second to accurate avionics and in-sim weather.  The avioincs are finally coming together thanks to WorkingTitle.  The weather is okay but needs a lot of improvement to be accurate.  

Sometimes it's not possible to have a super accurate sim so yes, we take to the real skies.

 

Let's see, at the current rate of flying a C 172 at around $140 per hour, and the 450 hours I have logged so far in MSFS, I guess I would have spent around $63,000.  Ouch.  I will stick with MSFS, I guess. 

Just now, Bobsk8 said:

Let's see, at the current rate of flying a C 172 at around $140 per hour, and the 450 hours I have logged so far in MSFS, I guess I would have spent around $63,000.  Ouch.  I will stick with MSFS, I guess. 

I totally understand that viewpoint.  Flying is not cheap!  Though if you were going to fly that much per year you'd invest and purchase your own aircraft as it would be cheaper in the long run.  Everyone is in a different spot with regards to finances.  MSFS is one of many ways to enjoy aviation outside of real flight.

20 minutes ago, ryanbatcund said:

I totally understand that viewpoint.  Flying is not cheap!  Though if you were going to fly that much per year you'd invest and purchase your own aircraft as it would be cheaper in the long run.  Everyone is in a different spot with regards to finances.  MSFS is one of many ways to enjoy aviation outside of real flight.

Looked into all that when I was an active flyer, between maintenace, and insurance, and aircraft payments, and hanger expenses, and fuel, it still is very expensive. If I had to get my PPL today, I don't think I would spend the money. When i started flying in teh late 70's I could rent a brand new 152 wet for $19 an hour. 

1 hour ago, sd_flyer said:

You can ask pretty much fighter pilot their opinion on say DCS and most will say yes  very like real airplane, but no not exactly like real airplane LOL. This statement can apply to every military and civilian sim! Yes, XP11 model is good but not perfect. Similar logic applies to MSFS! 

 

P.S. Some people in discussion don't even have MSFS installed yet eager to discuss flight model! LOL

 

Some people have MSFS installed but can't play since the forced update 5.

Stock fs airplanes are a joke, on par with the worst sim planes ever created with very low fidelity. Avionics, systems in general, atc and realtime weather are abysmal. However, through mods and third party one can experience a good simulation. But this seems to get borked after every update. Aerodynamics are good, crosswinds etc although I feel like xplane 11 was better on some aspects.

Until MS either relinquishes mandatory updates or allow for a rollback it will never be satisfactory. Imagine paying hundreds for a pmdg that you can't play for months due to an update? It is happening to many that bought the Aerosoft crj at this time.

6 minutes ago, shadow133 said:

 

Stock fs airplanes are a joke, on par with the worst sim planes ever created with very low fidelity.

 

Every sim I have ever flown since the mid 80s, has had stock airplanes that were a joke, every one. Actually, a few of the MSFS default aircraft are not too bad. 

Edited August 21, 20214 yr by Bobsk8

30 minutes ago, ryanbatcund said:

I totally understand that viewpoint.  Flying is not cheap!  Though if you were going to fly that much per year you'd invest and purchase your own aircraft as it would be cheaper in the long run.  Everyone is in a different spot with regards to finances.  MSFS is one of many ways to enjoy aviation outside of real flight.

Absolutely true, and it’s very close in many cases in MSFS, especially with the kind of photogrammetry and scenery we now have available.

But people still have to realize that it’s a software game. It’s a computer simulation of what flight is like in an aircraft. It’s not actually flying, and doesn’t make you a pilot anymore than playing Call of Duty makes you a Green Beret.

I always wonder what people forces to play this one sim they hate , instead of choosing a better one. 

 

I increase (or lower) the Rudder Authority under the plane sensitivities / customizations options.

Seems to work well.

bs

Edited August 21, 20214 yr by bean_sprout